Assessment of movement in Swedish PETE : A matter of learning or just ticking a box?

• The general knowledge base of Health and Physical Education Teacher Education (HPETE) is growing stronger. As a part of that knowledge base there is an ongoing discussion of the meaning of HPETE students’ movement capabilities (Brown 2013, Capel et al 2011, Johnson 2013, Siedentop 2009, Tinning 2010). Lee Shulman’s (1987) framework of Content Knowledge (CK) and Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) have been used by scholars to examine how students’ ability to move and their ability to teach are valued in HPETE (Backman & Pearson 2016, Herold & Waring 2016, Ward et al 2015). However, the students’ own voices about these issues have rarely been acknowledged. The aim with this paper is therefore to examine how HPETE students at one university in Sweden experience the assessment of movement knowledge in and about aquatics, dance and ice-skating. Semi-structured interviews with two groups including a total of seven students were performed by the one researcher at three different occasions. The interviewing researcher’s regularly work is not at the same university as the participating students. The interviews focused specifically on the teaching and assessment of aquatics, dance and skating within the first semester of HPETE. The transcription of the six interviews was performed by external assistance and the students were all anonymized in the transcribed material. The following analysis, performed by two researchers stationed at the same university as the participating students, focused on how the transcribed material related to the aim and the concepts of Shulman. Preliminary results show several expressions of that the students in our study were not sure of what kinds or what level of movement knowledge were expected of them as they entered HPETE. Further, several students expressed limited possibilities to develop movement ability merely through HPETE teaching but at the same time, practicing unfamiliar movements outside HPETE teacher-led teaching was rare. Although assessment of movement knowledge were most commonly expressed as a qualitative process, some students mentioned that they occasionally experienced assessment of movement knowledge as “a-tick-in-a-box”. Interestingly, the cognitive aspects of movement knowledge (i.e. describe, observe, analyse, discuss, etc.) were on the one hand expressed as vital, but on the other as less characterized by learning compared to the practice of movement skills. The results will be analysed and discussed in relation to research within the field and in relation to Lee Shulman’s framework of CK and PCK. Although making no claims to generalize the results in this study based on the limited number of participants, they might contribute to the discussion of what forms of knowledge to prioritise in HPETE, and thereby also help develop HPE on a school level.ReferencesBackman, E. & Pearson, P. 2016. “We should assess the students in more authentic situations”. Swedish PE teacher educators’ views of the meaning of movement skills for future PE teachers. European Physical Education Review. 22(1): 47-64.Brown, T.D. 2013. “A vision lost? (Re)articulating an Arnoldian conception of education ‘in’ movement in physical education.” Sport, Education and Society 18 (1): 21-37.Capel, S., Hayes, S., Katene, W. and P. Velija. 2011. “The interaction of factors which influence secondary student physical education teachers’ knowledge and development as teachers.” European Physical Education Review, 17 (2): 183–201.Herold, F. and M. Waring. 2016. “Is practical subject matter knowledge still important? Examining the Siedentopian perspective on the role of content knowledge in physical education teacher education.” Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1080/17408989.2016.1192592Johnson, T.G. 2013. “The value of performance in Physical Education teacher education.” Quest 65 (4): 485-497.Shulman, L.S. 1987. “Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform.” Harvard Educational Review 57 (1): 1-21.Siedentop, D. 2009. “Content Knowledge for Physical Education. In The Routledge Physical Education Reader, edited by R. Bailey and D. Kirk, 243-253. Abingdon: RoutledgeTinning, R. 2010. Pedagogy and human movement: theory, practice, research. Abingdon: Routledge.Ward, P., Kim, I., Ko, B. and W. Li. 2015. “Effects of Improving Teachers’ Content Knowledge on Teaching and Student Learning in Physical Education.” Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 86 (2): 130–139.

Ämnesord

SAMHÄLLSVETENSKAP  -- Utbildningsvetenskap (hsv//swe)

SOCIAL SCIENCES  -- Educational Sciences (hsv//eng)

Nyckelord

physical education teacher education

assessment

content knowledge

Utbildning och lärande

Education and Learning

Samhällsvetenskap/Humaniora

Publikations- och innehållstyp

ref (ämneskategori)

kon (ämneskategori)